Sherdil

democracy is an idea, there is nothing to dispute its existence. religions are doctrines with nothing to support their main objective - none of them provide any proof that god exists.

So how would you go about proving God's existence, or lack there of?

yes there are many failed religions as i mentioned earlier in my posts. no one worships zeus or Ra or apollo anymore. but at the time, there would have been many followers. in time there will be no followers of the current religions and either new ones will have taken their place or religion will have mostly died out. on the whole religious beliefs are decreasing world wide unfortunately they are not always being replaced by something positive.

So religion needs followers to exist? What if there was only one person who practiced the faith? Would it still exist?

yes they disagree and one might say that our way will increase your wealth by 3% per year or another might say our way will improve your health service. they DONT say unless you follow our way you are going to hell and we are going to heaven :)night night. to be continued tomorrow. my head hurts - maybe i should meditate

Tylenol should do the trick for your headache.

One more thing: Sikhism's holy book "Guru Granth Sahib" contains writings of Hindus and Muslims. They can't be rotting in hell if they are in our holy book, right?

Good night.

every religion that claims theirs is the only way. automatically rejecting other religions and by extension all other gods.

Well there are other ways. There is just disagreement on which way is right.

Just like the various branches of democracy disagree on which is the right method of governance.

following on from this, it is widely accepted that communism is a failed idea. hardly anywhere in the world is communist now, cuba and north korea being the exceptions and they are not doing too well. im quite sure that their people would vote for democracy if they had the chance.

Like how the Aztec religion is a failed idea, right?

I bet the natives are happy there are no more human sacrifices!

Lol.

as i stated above there are different methods of democracy it is constantly evolving. there are different methods of voting (first past the post/ proportional representation)

there are varying amounts of decisions made by a voted parliament vs referendums for everything. some are constitutional monarchies some are republics some are not properly democratic (votes are rigged,intimidation,bribes)

english has been evolving as has virtually every language, new words are added, some are forgotten, slangs are invented, regional words and pronunciations. we would hardly recognise english as spoken when first invented. it has many influences taken from latin,spanish,french,german,italian. it is not a set of rules designed to govern your life - it is simply a language.

your points lack validity.

do you mean the evolution of many types of religion? (strictly speaking it would be birth or invention) or do you mean the evolution of the each religions, meaning the ways they have changed and adapted?

Is it like Judaism and Islam being derived from the sons of Abraham? Christianity coming from Judaism?

Maybe like Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism having their roots in Hinduism?

yes it would, it would be disputed that it is wrong or right. its existence would not be disputed. other religions dispute the existence of other types of god and be extension the relevance of other religions.

Which religion disputes the existence of another type of God?

well someone earlier said that gurbani is the way to god, or perhaps naam is the way to god or enlightenment - well this would be hotly disputed by christians who believe the way to god is through jesus christ. sikhism states there is one god, hindus appear to have many gods and godesses (this may be disputed)

What's up with that?

and there have evolved many different democratic ways and these are debated every second of every day at some point in the world or another. there is no one place that decrees what democracy is and how we all must follow the one true way. (although the americans like to try )

You mean like the evolution of many different religions?

So which religion is the America of the bunch? I think I know...haha.

Democracy has evolved with time, democracy is an idea, its has no set ways. Democracy does not dictate on what to wear and what to eat.

So my question again, why would you follow scriptures that were written 500 years ago and completely base your life decisions on?

How has the idea of democracy changed? Doesn't it mean rule by the people?

I don't understand the question you are repeating. Are you saying that if something is old, it shouldn't be followed?

Why are we speaking English then? It's so old. Why don't we come up with a new language?

the facts of sikhism are disputed by a huge number of people because sikhs number so few compared to the world population.

Which facts of Sikhism are they disputing?

Because that is the fact and science has proved it.

But you still not have answered, why would you follow something, which was written 500 years ago and completely base your life around these teaching.

So if something is old, then we cannot follow it?

Democracy was invented by the Greeks over 2,000 years ago, but we still follow that.

So Sikhs would continue to follow something that was written 500 years ago in North India.

Wow, how does that make Sikhs any different to Muslims following Islam, which is from the middle east.

Copernicus concluded that the earth revolves around the Sun over 500 years ago.

Why do we still believe in that?

Geo: "So would you say that the followers of the Abrahamic religions are wrong given that there is only one god and therefor only one definition?"

@Geo

There is only one God, but there are more than one definition.

Blind mice describing an elephant. They feel different parts and describe different things, but it is the same elephant.

of course everyone is free to practice what they want, my question is how can it be that those practices are often contradictory? someone somewhere must have been wrong or mistaken.

moses was a prophet

jesus was a prophet/son of god

mohammed was a prophet

the gurus were prophets (is this correct?)

yet they teach contradictory values.

so you can choose either:

1. agree that one of them was right and the others are all wrong.

2. they are all correct and following either of them will get you where you want go.

one of many sources:

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.pdf

A prophet is someone who serves as an intermediary between God and humanity, to deliver God's message.

Moses talked to God (supposedly)

Jesus was the son of God (aren't we all)

Mohammed was told of God's will by the angel Gabriel (supposedly)

Guru Nanak meditated on the bank of a river, in the wilderness, for some time before proclaiming there is one God and there is no Muslim or Hindu. His inspiration came from meditation and deep reflective thought.

Your questions are inherently biased and flawed.

All religions don't want to reach the same place and are not after the same goal. The definition of God is different in Abrahamic and Dharmic faiths.

i dont think that if a fish "believed" in flying it would suddenly become a bird and be able to fly. i dont understand the validity of your point. people believe different things - yes of course. the questions i am asking are: what do you think/believe about their beliefs. that is where things get interesting.please see my post with the 1 and 2 options written toward the bottom.

thanks

God is not telling us to believe what we believe. Our Gurus have come up with a philosophy for living a life that will allow us to realize the truth about our existence and the illusion of the material world.

We don't practice Sikhism to please God. We practice it as a way of life, for our personal betterment. To make us better people and get the most meaning out this life we have.

Other "faiths" have different beliefs. I don't agree with them. Some claim that their faiths have been dictated by God. Sikhism doesn't believe in this.

However, everyone is free to practice whatever "faith" they want.

you can look directly at a solar eclipse. think about what you are writing. the sun is blocked during a solar eclipse. the period before and after - its best to wear shades.

science and religion are mutually exclusive

science requires evidence

religions requires faith (even though some of you argue sikhism is not based on faith)

you will find that most scientists are not religious.

If you require shades then that is not directly looking at it. You will burn your eyes.

Religion is a Western word used for a philosophy revolving around a guy in the sky.

Sorry there isn't an English word to describe Sikhism. It is a philosophy on life and a way to live life. It is a dharam.

Most scientists have traditionally come from Abrahamic backgrounds. How many of them understand Dharma? Not many.

Wrong.

I find it kind of shocking that you use claims in quantum physics to match your way of thinking, how wrong you are to so deductive, as far as I know the theory of quantum and particle physics is still trying to be understood with people working on the theory for over 30 years,

Show me one reputable text book or physicist backing these claim.

I watched Leonard Susskind and Lawrence Krauss and never have they claimed the thing you are, so could you provide some evidence of scientist that claim these are the conclusions of

the observations of measurement problem and where within Gurbani does it say we merg back with the "infinite pool of creativity" and we cannot observe God with these senses.

Thank you, look forward to your reply

If you find logical thinking shocking, then we can't see eye to eye. You just disregarded a whole branch of science, lol. That's like someone disregarding astronomy, when arguing that the earth is the center of the universe.

The traditional laws of physics break down at the subatomic level. Quantum Physics is relevant and necessary.

Do a google search yourself for reputable scientists that support this claim. Look through textbooks yourself. Are you giving me homework? Making me hunt for the magical goose egg that will show you the light? Why should I bother?

This should suffice

?

If science doesn't match up with Sikhi, then it is due to a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the two.

IS THERE GOD??? Debate has gone on long enough.

Dharmic faiths don't believe in a guy in the sky who is God.

We believe in a universal energy and consciousness. This is the Supreme Brahman.

We are all a part of this consciousness. There is no "I" as we are a part of the universe.

Scientific Backing

The measurement problem in quantum physics states that an atom appears as a wave when not being observed, and a particle when it is observed.

Conclusion: The universe manifests itself as it is being observed. We are all observing the same thing, therefore we are all part of the same conscious.

Creativity therefore derives from an infinitely abstract pool of consciousness that is waiting to be tapped into.THIS IS GOD.

CONQUER YOUR MIND AND YOU WILL REACH GOD (the state of Sach Khand)

RENCARNATION

Death is the death of your consciousness. Medically speaking, someone is legally dead when they don't have any brain function.

When you die your conscious returns to this infinite pool of creativity, where new things are manifested.

TRYING TO OBSERVE GOD DIRECTLY

Cannot be done. We don't have the equipment (our senses). Some people will only be satisfied if they can see and touch God. It cannot be done.

You cannot look directly at a solar eclipse. But you can deduce that it is there, through indirect means.

PEOPLE COMING ON HERE TO GIVE US A LECTURE ON WHY SCIENCE IS BETTER THAN RELIGION, NEITHER UNDERSTAND SCIENCE NOR SIKHISM.

i dont have any followers. and age of the religion is not the issue. what i am asking is gurbani or sikhism the only path to truth and god. some people say yes but i think you are saying no, there are other paths. is that correct?

therefor my next question is: why is it allowed for some people to smoke, eat meat, drink wine, cut their hair and still acheive unity with god/reach heaven but other people are not allowed to do some or all of these things?

why are people of some religions told in their holy book that only jesus is the way or only mohammed is the way?

either they are following the wrong path or different people have been allowed to follow different paths to reach god?

thanks

Sikhism says that God cannot be realized by reading the Hindu scriptures or the books of the Abrahamic religions (Bible, Koran, Torah). It's a difference of opinion.

Why do birds fly and fish swim? That's what they do. People believe different things.

There are different schools of thought. People don't agree on everything. What's your point?

Science and Sikhism are not mutually exclusive.

dont you find it strange that only a tiny minority of people have a shot to get to god?

obviously people can convert but lets get real, that is not happening in any great numbers. there are billions of people who beleive they are on the right path but they are all wrong because sikhism is the only way?

im sure you know that as deeply as you hold this belief, there are christians out there who deeply believe that the only way to heaven/god is through jesus?

and there are muslims out there who say the only way is through the prophet mohammed and the koran?

do you really think they are all wrong and only sikhs are correct? i just want to know your honest views.

Most people used to think the world was flat. What's your point?

Sikhism is only a few hundred years old. So what if you have more followers? Big wup.

Sikhism says that a Muslim should be a good Muslim and a Hindu should be a good Hindu, as all religions teach us to treat each other with respect at their core.

We respect all people of all religions to worship as they please, unlike some religions who believe their prophet is the only one that should be followed.

As Sikhs we believe that the path laid out by our Gurus is the best way to realize God in this life. That's why we are Sikhs.

So...

Having pictures at home means that person is doing idol (photo) worship regardless of whether he is actually doing it or not?? This certainly does not make sense. I guess if such thing makes sense then maybe we need to take down all pictures of shaheeds from langar halls and probably stop and pull out production of animated movies and so on.. Oh wait that is what musalman are doing foe centuries. Yes pooja to material/product is plain wrong but don't mix or link families having photos in same category as with rare ppl who who do anti gurmat pooja stuff.

Tose who still believes purewal calendar makes sense, read this: http://sikhsangat.org/2012/purewal-calendar-created-to-divide-or-to-unite-sikhs/

Johal sahib, I still did not get your reply on how purewal uncle fixed dates on his nanakshahi calendar...

Tuhi Tuhi said that worshipping stone idols is okay. I was replying to him.

Talk about knee j e r k reactions. Who said anything about shaheeds or animated movies?

We are talking about people praying in front of portraits of the Gurus. This is clearly wrong, because the portrait is not our Guru. Unlike Guru Granth Sahib, a portrait cannot give you guidance.

You want a representation of Guru Nanak? Then go read Guru Granth Sahib. His teachings are represented there.

Give me a better solution to stop people from praying to these portraits. How will you educate them?

the source or medium of Bhagat Dhanna's realization of waheguru was "pathar"........pathar was the starting point on this journey........if the start is wrong, the destination can never be achieved.......Bhagat Dhanna ji did it through pathar.....

The whole idea of the pathar being God was a lie, as the Brahman was eating the offerings himself.

God ate Dhanna's offering to spare his innocence, so that Dhanna wouldn't be exposed to the deceitful ways of this world.

Guru Gobind Singh, Dasam Granth, 79

Guru Gobind Singh, Dasam Granth, 110

To honor the deceased person's memory and allow the family to have closure.

The deceased aren't waiting for your prayers on the other side.

Guru Nanak dev ji came across people in a river, splashing water towards their dead ancestors, that were supposedly living on the Sun.

Guru ji started to splash water in the opposite direction.

The confused people asked him what he was doing.

He replied, "I am watering my fields"

The people asked, "How can you water your fields from so far away."

Guru ji replied "If you can send water to your ancestors on the Sun, then why can't I send water to my fields?"